|
 |
Renaming the cities of other countries... | ||
Tags: Names | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| minus273 Triglot Senior Member France Joined 5773 days ago 288 posts - 346 votes  Speaks: Mandarin*, EnglishC2, French Studies: Ancient Greek, Tibetan | Message 57 of 192 17 November 2009 at 9:10pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
No, this is too complicated. Trying this time to simplify it. (Invasion, change of dominate ethnic groups etc are bogus, as this would not explain much the difference in name)
We call the name of city C in language L at time t as C_L_t. For two languages L1 and L2. Sure, there exists a time T that C_L1_T sounds really like C_L2_T. At time T'>T, most probably C_L1_T' is a direct descendant of C_L1_T, same for L2. However, the changes suffered by L1 and L2 in the time interval T...T' are different, so C_L1_T' is not phonologically equivalent to C_L2_T' any more. Edited by minus273 on 17 November 2009 at 9:24pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
 Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6711 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map | Message 58 of 192 17 November 2009 at 10:14pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
I wrote this already in my first post in this thread, so frankly I don't see why I should don sackcloth and ashes. If there is a strong consensus about how cities should be named then I follow the standard (apart from one special case, i.e. in an enumeration of French cities - which is a very rare case). If there isn't a strong consensus then it is NOT part of the Danish language that I should use the modified form. And it is only a small number of towns that have such a form, - most cities in the world don't, and many that have one only has it as a sideform which I can ignore. And I know my native Danish well enough to know which cities lie in the greyzone and which ones have a strong Danish form. For me it is logical to use the local form if I know it (and if those I communicate with also know it). Some cities got a special name because people long time ago didn't speak foreign languages and only rudiments of geography. I bow to the consensus and use this name if there is a consensus, but personally I find it totally idiotic to have ONE single French town with a special form. Gusutafu's example with "erede" is interesting, even though it has little to to with names for cities: it is a simple fact that the Nordic languages successively have transformed strong verbs into weak verbs. Each time the change begins as an 'error' which becomes more and more common until it has become the norm. However "at være" (to be) will probably be the last strong/irregular verb to succumb to this tendency. In my perspective all the modified city names are essentially errors, which just became the forms preferred by a majority, - and in a few cases they simply became the ONLY possible forms. And then I also have to use them. Any living language is fundamentally built on errors that just became the norm.
I have explained quite clearly that I do use the forms that really are obligatory (i.e. half a dozen of cities plus most country names and other geographical names). And now you use language that is close to threats because I call a number of foreign cities in the grey zone by their true names? That's simply sick. Edited by Iversen on 17 November 2009 at 11:15pm 5 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Gusutafu Senior Member Sweden Joined 5529 days ago 655 posts - 1039 votes Speaks: Swedish* | Message 59 of 192 17 November 2009 at 11:23pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
I don't agree with this at all. Inconsistency is not the same as error. Cities are things. Names of cities are words. Those words can differ between languages, that's not an error.
I don't really see how you can take this as a threat, but I am sorry if you did understand it that way. In Swedish most capitals and many other places and cities have Swedish names, not just half a dozen. The point, anyway, was that I know that most Swedes would be annoyed, especially if you (=someone) would insist on "local" pronunciation, not just overall form. Also, I am genuinely curious how you handle cases like Dublin or Jerusalem, which also brings another question: do you conform to the local dialect as well, or are you satisfied with the official language of the nation. That wouldn't seem very correct either. I guess Canton would be a revealing test of this. It's Kanton in Danish, Guǎngzhōu in Mandarin and Gwóngjàu in Cantonese. What do you call it? 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6711 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map | Message 60 of 192 18 November 2009 at 2:01am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
OK, let's take some concrete examples. Dublin is Dublin, - English is the language spoken by the overwhelming majority in Ireland, and the name Dublin is even said to have Nordic roots. Jerusalem is close to being one of those city names that can't be called otherwise, - the reason of course being the frequent use in religious contexts. But I would personally prefer the name "Yerushaláyim",which has a much more 'gutsy' sound. In Danish Canton is outdated, but relevant in historical texts about the trade companies. However you did catch me in an inconsistency: I didn't know the Cantonese name, so I would call it Guǎngzhōu. And I have seen that name used in some travel agency programs so I'm not alone in using a Mandarin name for that town.
In Asia I say Myan-Mar and Yangon, not Rangoon, Bangkok and not the name that begins with Krungtep, Phomh Penh and Vientiane - but I know that there are some slightly different versions of this name. Mostly 'Singapore', but sometimes 'Singapura'. In my travelogue from Vietnam I don't use the name Ho Chi Minh city, but good ol' Saigon, which as far as I know still is a valid name for the central part of the city (where I stayed). This case is akin to that of Pretoria in South Africa, which now only covers the central area - the new official name is allegedly Tshwane. The only town in South Africa that has a Danish name is Kapstaden aka Cape Town, - and I say Cape Town. Cairo is always called Cairo in Danish, so there I do as everybody else. 'Dimashq' is my preferred version of the Syrian capital, but with people who haven't travelled in the region I use Damascus. I also use the new Indian city names Mumbay, Chennai and Kolkatta, but sometimes I add Bombay, Madras and Calcutta for clarity. In the Americas I can't find one single city that I would call by a Danish name - not even the small town "Jensen" (/djensen/). And I always say "Ciudad de Mexico" - no compromises about that. Which leaves Europe. I do actually say "Parisssssssss" (but cringing!) and mostly also "Athen" (but Athinai with people that travel a lot like myself), mostly Roma - but with a Danish back tongue R unless I have just referred to a series of other Italian cities. I would say any other Italian town in Italian, i.e. with tongue tip r - and so far I haven't been attacked by anybody for doing that. Finnish towns: mostly the Finnish name, but around Turku I might add the Swedish name - Åbo, Nådendal. Generally Praha, Lisboa, Girona (not Gerona) and so forth. Flensborg sometimes when I speak about border shopping, but otherways German towns in their German form. And the funny thing is that I haven't had negative reactions (until now, that is). Not even when I said Derry everywhere in Londonderry except at the railway station. Edited by Iversen on 18 November 2009 at 2:08am 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| anamsc Triglot Senior Member Andorra Joined 6211 days ago 296 posts - 382 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish, Catalan Studies: Arabic (Levantine), Arabic (Written), French | Message 61 of 192 18 November 2009 at 3:13am | IP Logged | ||||||||
Incidentally, I have been told that it is more common to call Damascus "Ash-Sham" or something like that (I could be wrong though), and I am pretty sure that Mexicans generally refer to Mexico City as "México" or "D.F"! 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Gusutafu Senior Member Sweden Joined 5529 days ago 655 posts - 1039 votes Speaks: Swedish* | Message 62 of 192 19 November 2009 at 5:14pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
This link might be interesting for readers of this thread:4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_European_cities_in_dif ferent_languages I know I should have kept it to myself and pretended to know it all by heart... 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Gamauyun Diglot Newbie United States Joined 5656 days ago 26 posts - 36 votes Speaks: English*, Russian Studies: Romanian, German | Message 63 of 192 20 November 2009 at 2:16am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
I think that place names (cities or otherwise) which have been commonly used in a language for centuries, and adapted to the normal spelling and pronunciation of a language shouldn't be treated any differently than any other historical loanword. I would say that, for example, Paris as pronounced [PE:ris] isn't a French word. It's an English word, and related to the French word Paris [paRI:] in the same way as any other English borrowing from Latin is to its French equivalent. The same would go for place names like Japan, which have an exonym greatly different from their local name.
I wouldn't say the same for city names which don't have this historical borrowing, and are just an adapted pronunciation of the local name. I know there isn't a very clear point at which a word borrowed into English, for example, can be considered an English word, but there's certainly a difference between the English mispronunciation of the Arabic place name Iraq (especially as [ai-Ræk], which should be punishable by death) and the pronunciation of historical Arabic loanwords like sugar or mosque. Edited by Gamauyun on 20 November 2009 at 2:18am 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Halie Diglot Groupie United States Joined 6118 days ago 80 posts - 106 votes Speaks: English*, French | Message 64 of 192 20 November 2009 at 5:43am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
I think you make yourself look like a fool and an elitist if you don't pronounce the name of the city correctly in the language in which you're speaking.
For example, you don't say "I want to go to Paris (pronounced the French way)" and you don't say "je veux aller a London." C'est Londres! 2 persons have voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
